nsequently the
next value cannot be read correctly. (Interestingly scanf does read all of
"1e+00" and "0.0e+00".)
Work-around might be to read line by line and use sscanf instead of scanf.
Regards,
Erik Massop
On Mon, October 28, 2013 10:37 pm, fechn...@gmail.com wrote:
> Hi,
>
smuladd.o time.o
/home/erik/sage/local/var/tmp/sage/build/atlas-3.10.1.p6/ATLAS-build/bin/ATLrun.sh
/home/erik/sage/local/var/tmp/sage/build/atlas-3.10.1.p6/ATLAS-build/tune/sysinfo
xsma -f /tmp/xsma.out -m 1000
$ cat /tmp/xsma.out
2255.64
2255.64
2272.73
Regards,
Erik Massop
--
You recei
eadlines, and
therefore no time to figure out how to keep my modification from being
moved to old/.
Regards,
Erik Massop
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
Dear list,
This seems to be the bug 'scanf %f doesn't parse "0e+0" correctly' in
glibc [1].
Regards,
Erik Massop
[1] https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15917
On Wed, 30 Oct 2013 13:48:38 +0100
Erik Massop wrote:
> Dear list,
>
> On We
Dear list,
On Thu, 31 Oct 2013 14:19:29 + (UTC)
Dima Pasechnik wrote:
> On 2013-10-30, Erik Massop wrote:
> > This seems to be the bug 'scanf %f doesn't parse "0e+0" correctly' in
> > glibc [1].
>
> is it really a bug? I am not sure. Normally
> no changes.
This looks like the bug [1] in glib 2.18, in which scanf fails to read
"0e+00". See the thread "ATLAS build fails on Core i7-3770" on this
list.
Was 5.11 built using the same glibc version?
Regards,
Erik Massop
[1] https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.c
Begin forwarded message:
Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2013 03:59:01 -0800
From: Paul Lutus
To: Erik Massop
Subject: Re: [sage-devel] Re: Sage 5.12 fails to build Atlas, 64-bit
SuSE 13.1
On 11/22/2013 03:08 AM, Erik Massop wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Nov 2013 16:28:52 -0800 (PST)
> lutusp wrote:
&
On Fri, 22 Nov 2013 03:59:01 -0800
Paul Lutus wrote:
> On 11/22/2013 03:08 AM, Erik Massop wrote:
> > On Thu, 21 Nov 2013 16:28:52 -0800 (PST)
> > lutusp wrote:
> >
> >> On Thursday, November 21, 2013 1:23:14 PM UTC-8, lutusp wrote:
> >>> matime: Asser
conf['SPARC?']:
print 'Base configuration on SPARC.'
arch = 'USIII'
elif conf['PPC?']:
print 'Base configuration on PPC.'
arch = 'PPCG4'
elif conf['IA64?']:
print 'Base configur
their password?
Regards,
Erik Massop
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, sen
s a
different approach, namely replacing scanf by strtod.
The patch is a bit more complicated than necessary, as checking
"end ! = buf" instead of "errno == 0 && end ! = buf && *end == '\n'"
is probably sufficient for this usecase.
Regards,
Erik Massop
--
ening for me to learn git-trac now, so I tried this only with pure
git ("git fetch trac" and "git push trac master:u/emassop/test"). I
really don't see why this would interfere with git-trac though.
Regards,
Erik Massop
[1]
http://technosorcery.net/blog/2011/12/26/ho
ars and then hashing. (I think this
would also make it easier to have representation independence as
normalization is probably easier over fields.)
What do you think is the way to go?
Regards,
Erik Massop
[1] https://docs.python.org/2/library/functions.html#hash : "Numeric
values that compa
that the contract is satisfied for all relevant keys. (This
would avoid having to change all cached functions.)
Regards,
Erik Massop
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from
es for rationals:
sage: map(lambda X: hash(X(1/2)), [QQ, float, RR, CC, RIF, CIF, AA,
QQbar])
[3,
1073741824,
1073741824,
1073741824,
2047423852,
128131206,
-1422939175,
-2128581059]
Regards,
Erik Massop
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"
. You should be careful
about the key universe though. If the map from the old universe to the
new one is not injective you might end up with several values for the
same key, so either the universe should be specified up front, or an
exception should be thrown when there are clashes.
Regards,
Erik
often. So I did
$ git grep \\b_hash_\\b
and found only a few handfuls of matches for _hash_. Also __hash__ of
SageObject[2] is just hash(self.__repr__()), so there is no caching
there.
It seems to me that _hash_ is not used as suggested in the tutorial,
or am I missing something?
Regards,
Erik
Category of unital magmas,
Category of magmas,
Category of finite enumerated sets,
Category of enumerated sets,
Category of finite sets,
Category of sets,
Category of sets with partial maps,
Category of objects]
sage: [x for x in G]
[(), (1,2,3,4), (1,3)(2,4), (1,4,3,2)]
sage: G.first()
()
sage: G.last
nt set becomes apparent when
comparing assertions I and IV.
The words "of ZZ/3ZZ" are important indeed in assertion VI: If we had
read "of ZZ", then this assertion would be pointing directly at its own
counterexample.
Regards,
Erik Massop
--
You received this message because yo
measure the sensitivity of
> the computed solution to slight changes in the initial data. The
> numbers used in solving the system are exactly the represented
> floating-point numbers.
>
> > They're representatives for the actual (either unknown or impossible
> > to represent)
so, do you have some
pointers? That'd be interesting.
Regards,
Erik Massop
On Wed, 20 Aug 2014 16:47:03 -0700 (PDT)
rjf wrote:
>
>
> On Saturday, August 9, 2014 7:35:13 PM UTC-7, Erik Massop wrote:
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> > Similarly I would call
a docstring-perspective is
probably getting rid of expression().
Is there a ticket for this?
Regards,
Erik Massop
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
Dear all,
This is now ticket #16871: http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/16871
Regards,
Erik Massop
On Thu, 21 Aug 2014 13:33:53 -0700 (PDT)
Volker Braun wrote:
> +1 to dynamically generating a suitable docstring if the expression
> consists only of a single constant. But IMHO it
y GUI-y though... Moreover the merge conflicts will still
have to be fixed. This view might help with doing the merge though.
Regards,
Erik Massop
[1]
http://git.sagemath.org/sage.git/diff/?id2=develop&id=u/vinceknight/game_theory__build_capacity_to_solve_matching_games_in_to_sage_
[2]
http:
rrible thing ]
So in this case the old description would give a much more efficient
comparison. Unfortunately, it's discarded...
Regards,
Erik Massop
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and st
r
ii) making up a total ordering of the occurring vertex labels and
storing it globally.
There're probably more options, but I hope this helps.
Regards,
Erik Massop
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubs
st of incoming or outgoing list?
If there is a total (pre)order, everything should be fine. If there is
not, my bet is as good as yours.
> Is there even some kind of general rule about this kind of thing at Sage?
If there is, I'd like to know.
Regards,
Erik Massop
--
You received t
aph. Do
> you have an example where it is not the case ?
Yes:
G = Graph()
G.add_vertex(zero)
G.add_vertex(one)
H = Graph()
H.add_vertex(one)
H.add_vertex(zero)
print G == H
print list(G.vertex_iterator()) == list(H.vertex_iterator())
print G.vertices() == H.vertices()
gives me
True
False
(G.vertex_iterator()) == list(H.vertex_iterator())
False
The trick underlying the example is the same as before:
sage: hash(-1) == hash(-2)
True
Cheers,
Erik Massop
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this grou
though as iterables [one,two] and (one,two) are the
same.
Regards,
Erik Massop
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to sage-devel+unsubscr...
ppose
furthermore that you have a (facade) poset with elements x, y, and
E=(x,y). Now foo'(x,y) has args==(x,y)==E and therefore returns E
regardless of the order in the poset, which is not what is wanted from
foo'(x,y).
Regards,
Erik Massop
--
You received this message because you a
and
# self.x.__eq__ (other.x) otherwise
def __hash__(self, x):
# recurse for tuples, frozensets, ...
# try _strict_hash_
# otherwise use __hash__
Regards,
Erik Massop
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
On Tue, 28 Oct 2014 10:41:16 -0700 (PDT)
Volker Braun wrote:
> On Tuesday, October 28, 2014 5:16:47 PM UTC, Erik Massop wrote:
> >
> > class CoercingDict:
> > def __init__(self, f):
> > self.f = f
> > self.data = dict()
On Tue, 28 Oct 2014 13:24:18 -0700 (PDT)
Volker Braun wrote:
> The language is explained here
>
> http://www.sagemath.org/doc/tutorial/tour_coercion.html#conversion-versus-
coercion
Thanks!
> On Tuesday, October 28, 2014 8:06:44 PM UTC, Erik Massop wrote:
> >
> > s
n this thread
> currently returns 0. Do you get the same result?
I'm not interested enough to calculate this by hand, sorry.
> Since the derivative is 0 would we want to say therefore that
>
> log(exp(z-conjugate(z)))
>
> is a constant? If not, isn't this an argument for
2014-11-29 20:30 GMT+00:00 Joni-Pekka Kurronen :
...
> (sage-sh) root@mpi1:src$
...
Are you compiling as root? Try compiling as a non-root user; Python
refuses some things when run as root as a security precaution.
Regards,
Erik Massop
--
You received this message because you are subscri
nguished.
For non-nice rings, I think it might be good to embed into a ring where
there is a distinguished fraction representation and take the hash
there. For instance Q(R[X]) might be embedded in Q(Q(R)[X]), which is
better since Q(R)[X] is Euclidean.
Regards,
Erik Massop
--
You received thi
37 matches
Mail list logo
